Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Perlmutter for yielding, and I thank him for, really, the eloquent conversation he has been having for the last half an hour about the extreme importance of the investigation that is going on and recognizing the fact that this is the 1-year anniversary, and obviously, we still have a long ways to go. This is a very critical issue, and we need to continue to support Robert Mueller and the work that he is doing, and I am very grateful for all that is going on.

May 17 is not only the first anniversary of that investigation, but it is also the day we started the debate on the farm bill. And for those of you who have been following this, you will see that this week there are going to be amendments and general debate around this particular bill. I have also been joined by a couple of my colleagues from SEEC, the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition, because we want to talk specifically tonight about how this farm bill harms the environment and conservation.

You are going to hear all kinds of things about the farm bill. Some of the most egregious challenges are within the nutrition title, which takes up about 80 percent of the resources of the farm bill. But it is very important to talk about the role of the environment in this bill.

A lot of people don't think about the farm bill as an environmental bill, but actually, farmland accounts for over 40 percent of our Nation's land, and what happens to farms and working forests has a huge impact on water quality, on wildlife, on environmental health, and the farm bill contains many provisions, some of which people don't often know that much about, that are important to conservation programs for farmers.

Farmers understand why it is important to care for the land that takes

care of them. They know that conservation practices ensure that the resource remains sustainable while helping them to save money, preparing for environmental issues like drought and extreme weather. Conservation practices that sequester carbon in the soil, put more organic matter in the soil, have a huge impact on our ability to sequester carbon, which we all know is very important to issues around climate change.

I just want to go over a few of the highlights, or you could say the low lights, of this bill when it comes to environmental practices, and then I am happy to share with several others who would like to talk about some of the programs, and we will have a little dialogue about it.

One of the things that happens is it eliminates the Conservation Stewardship Program. These are financial incentives for farmers to implement long-term conservation practices that benefit wildlife and natural resources, which also help their bottom line. Elimination of this program is about $1 billion cut for conservation.

Also, within the program, they are folding in the Conservation Stewardship Program into another program called EQIP, and these two programs will be worked together. And while maybe that sounds like it is streamlining in Maine, we are worried that they will have far less in resources overall.

In Maine, programs have been particularly important to helping what has been a growth in small farms in our State and more resources to our farmers. People have built hoop houses, which extend our season and allow you to grow more in the early season and into the late season, helped with wells, composting facilities, a variety of other things. Now we are going to combine those programs, have less in resources, and farmers will just be fighting for far less dollars.

The bill also eliminates a lot of mandatory funding. And one program I wanted to mention was the REAP program, Renewable Energy for America Program. I think many of us really care about renewable resources and allowing our farms and rural businesses to have more energy efficiency, use alternative energy improvements. This helps to reduce their environmental impact, and, again, their costs. It is very difficult to make a good living on a farm, and that has to be factored in as well.

In Maine, the REAP program has helped install solar power, helped maple syrup producers reduce energy costs, generated energy from biomass, built more efficient processing systems, built an anaerobic digester, and so much more. So this is also a very critical program that is now going to be changed in the way it is funded, and that means we can't count on it going into the future.

There are a lot of policy riders--and I am hoping my colleagues will talk about a few more of them--that will hurt farmers and the health of rural communities in many ways, and these have no place in the farm bill.

One of them that I have heard a lot about from my constituents--and there is a lot of talk about--is the King amendment--the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King)--that would preempt local and State laws, which would preempt many of those laws that impact pesticides and animal welfare.

Now, Maine, where we are a very outspoken State, we believe in agriculture, and we care deeply about the environment. We already have 30 communities that have local pesticide laws restricting pesticides. That would be eliminated under this because they would be preempted.

We have other laws about crate sizes, breeding crate sizes, puppy mills; any of those kinds of things that regulate animal practices, States would no longer be allowed to do. This is not a good States' rights issue. It is bad for the issues that we care about, and we should not allow this amendment to pass.

There are also a variety of issues that would impact the Endangered Species Act. Now, we are lucky in Maine. Since 1978, when the impacts of DDT had reduced the number of bald eagles to about 20 nesting pairs, once that was eliminated and there was no more DDT, fast forward to today, in the last count, we have 500-plus bald eagles in our State. Almost everywhere in our State you can see a bald eagle out there fishing, doing its work.

Well, the language in this bill would say that when reviewing pesticides and herbicides, there would no longer be any requirement for the EPA to consult expert wildlife agencies to identify and minimize impact to endangered species. Many of us are deeply worried about the effect on pollinators like bees and butterflies, which are critically important to agriculture. We can't exist without pollinators, and this is a terrible time to put them in further danger.

I will just mention one more and then yield to a couple of my colleagues who are ready to speak. One provision in the farm bill would undermine the National Environmental Policy Act, that is, NEPA. Again, those are critically important reviews that go on in anything that we do. To weaken that would harm our communities, our environment, and our public health.

So I have done a little bit of a broad overview, and I could talk about things that frustrate me in this farm bill all night long, but I want to yield to one of my great colleagues from the State of Oregon, someone who represents the other Portland, as we say. I have the first Portland.

Mr. Speaker, more importantly, I yield back to my friend from Colorado.

Mr. Speaker, during rollcall Vote No. 179 on H.R. 3053, I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``no'' when I should have voted ``yes.''

Stated against:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and thank an organization in my District that is celebrating 40 years of supporting rural communities, economies, and families in Maine and across the nation.

In the 1970s, social activist and theology student Ron Phillips came to Maine to replicate a community-based economic development model he had seen succeed in places around the world. So began Coastal Enterprises Inc.--or CEI as it has become known--which made its first loan in 1978 to rebuild a waterfront facility that had burned down and was central to the local fishing community.

Since its humble beginnings, CEI has loaned over $1.3 billion, which in turn has leveraged an additional $2.8 billion in investment. At this point, it is hard to find an area of Maine's rural economy and community infrastructure that CEI has not touched. Adapting to the greatest needs and opportunities of our state over the last four decades, it has helped build more than 2,000 affordable housing units, invested in over 2,700 businesses, supported over 37,000 jobs, and created or preserved more than 5,800 child-care openings.

But CEI is not only a source of financing for worthy projects. It is trusted partner and leader in moving Maine forward, whether that means helping recent immigrants launch their own businesses, supporting women entrepreneurs, strengthening our state's agricultural and fisheries industries, or providing counseling to help Mainers stay in their homes.

Despite its growth, the organization has stayed true to the communities it serves and to its founding values. CEI's staff is just as comfortable conversing with CEOs and corporate financiers as they are with fishermen on the dock and farmers in the field.

I have been proud to work closely with this organization both in Washington and in Maine. I wholeheartedly thank CEI for its work, celebrate its impact on our communities over the last 40 years, and wish it many more years of success.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from California (Mr. Lowenthal) for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, I, too, rise today in support of H.R. 4266, the Acadia National Park Boundary Clarification Act. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bipartisan bill, which was introduced by my colleague from Maine (Mr. Poliquin).

While you have already heard from Mr. Poliquin a lot about the importance of the intertidal zone, about the livelihood of clam diggers and wormers, and about the Acadia National Park, because our State is so important and we love our park, I am pretty much going to say it all again.

Maine is very proud to be home to Acadia National Park. This national treasure is a place where the mountains actually meet the sea. When you climb those mountains, you see miles of clear, blue ocean dotted with literally some of the hundreds and thousands of islands off the coast of Maine, one of which I am lucky enough to live on, not the one where Acadia National Park is.

But millions of people visit Acadia National Park every year to experience the incredible natural attractions, the hiking, and the climbing. But they also come there to be in downeast Maine. Downeast Maine is full of very many tight-knit communities, and those tight-knit communities are full of hardworking men and women, many of whom make their living on the water; and it is really hard work. Some of them are hauling lobster traps every day so that we can enjoy the wonderful lobster that is only delicious if you get it from the State of Maine. But many of them are bent over digging in the mud for clams, for other species, and for bloodworms; and it is really hard work.

H.R. 4266 would clarify a number of points to strengthen the park's relationship with the surrounding communities that we have been talking about. Most importantly, this bill will ensure that clammers, wormers, and other traditional harvesters can continue to work in the places where, frankly, they have worked for generations, many of them working alongside their sons or daughters when they go out every day.

In the spring of 2016, the harvesters were shocked when the park staff began prohibiting them from working

along the coastline within Acadia's boundaries. There was no warning about changing a practice that had, frankly, gone on for decades. I appreciate the fact that park officials quickly ended their enforcement, but the actions sent shock waves throughout the area.

Washington County is the poorest county in Maine, and families there simply just can't afford to lose any source of income. H.R. 4266 would give the communities a sense of security by very explicitly stating that harvesters have a right to work within the park. It is a critical step to ensuring that Acadia National Park remains an attraction not only for its natural beauty, but for its unique way of life.

Again, I want to thank my colleague, Mr. Poliquin, for recognizing the issue, for working with his harvesters, and for moving this forward. I am proud to be an original cosponsor. I urge its passage and urge all my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize a tireless and visionary veteran and federal employee for her work to protect and improve the lives of her fellow citizens.

Diane Dzurisin is retiring after seventeen years with the VA, two decades in the military, and six years of long-term care nursing. It has been said that if you choose work that you love, then you never have to work another day. I suspect that has been the case for Diane during her impressive career. When my constituent services staff has needed guidance to resolve the most challenging VA cases, she has never failed to ensure that each veteran's concerns were appropriately and expeditiously addressed. Her awareness of and sensitivity to the unique challenges of adjudicating claims following military sexual trauma has lifted the burdens and changed the lives of countless veterans.

People like Diane Dzurisin never really retire--they reinvent. On behalf of a grateful nation, I want to thank her for her service, honor her for her dedication to veterans, and wish her all the best as she embarks on this new journey.

Mr. Speaker, Sandy Hook, Orlando, Las Vegas, Sutherland Springs, and now Parkland. The common denominator between all these awful tragedies has been the use of assault weapons. Built to kill, these customizable weapons have allowed gunmen to slaughter dozens of innocent people swiftly, easily, and with no special training.

Since the ban on assault weapons lapsed in 2004, far too many of these weapons have ended up in the wrong hands. There is no one solution to reducing the mass shootings and other forms of gun violence in our Nation, but reinstating the ban on assault weapons would be a critical first step. I urge all of my House colleagues to put public safety before the gun lobby and pass the Assault Weapons Ban of 2018 to keep weapons of war off the streets and out of our schools.

I have heard from students across Maine who want to feel safe in their schools. They do not want their classrooms to look and feel like prisons. They do not want to live in fear that someone could enter their school with a firearm that is capable of committing mass murder. We owe it to the generation of students who are growing up against a backdrop of lockdown drills and mass shootings. We need to act like adults and protect them by banning assault weapons.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Hawaii for the time.

I rise today as well in support of H.R. 2504, a bill that will end the practice of duplicative export inspections for sea urchin and sea cucumbers that are being shipped overseas.

This is the second time that the House has considered this legislation in recent years. I want to thank Chairman Bishop; Subcommittee Chairman Lamborn; Ranking Member Grijalva; and my good friend from California, Ranking Member Huffman, for their support in bringing this bill again to the floor today.

I also want to thank my colleague from Arizona (Mr. Gosar) for being here to speak in favor of this bill today.

Also, in the bipartisan effort that we are making here today, I want to recognize and thank my colleague from Maine (Mr. Poliquin), who well knows the importance of this issue and who has been an original cosponsor of this bill, both in this Congress and the last.

I think it is important to explain to the Members who are here today a little bit about why this bill is important and especially critical to our Nation's sea urchin industry.

As a few Members may know, but most probably don't, the sea urchin industry in Maine brings in over $5.4 million to our State every year. It supports 600 jobs, which includes harvesters of the species. Also, we have businesses in Maine which process the urchins harvested here, as well as those imported from Canada and Chile, before being exported overseas.

The need for this bill revolves around ending a duplicative inspection of exported product that is unnecessary and costly. Urchins imported to Maine from other countries to be processed are inspected by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service when they get to the United States. This scrutiny is necessary to ensure the integrity of the imported products.

However, in recent years, the Fish and Wildlife Service has inspected products once again before leaving the country, usually in New York or New Jersey. This occurs before they are shipped to Asia and Japan, in particular, where they are considered a delicacy.

I have spent the past few years working with my colleagues in the Maine delegation to better understand the impact of this policy on small businesses in our State and others where the urchins are harvested. I believe these extra inspections are unnecessary. There is really no reason why sea urchins should be treated differently than shellfish, which have been exempted from these export inspections for decades.

This process often leads to costly delays and lost product, as urchins may end up sitting in hot warehouses waiting for days. At times, the Fish and Wildlife office closes right when a shipment arrives for inspection. The highly perishable product must then sit there because of bad timing.

The Fish and Wildlife Service has worked with my office to try to find solutions, and I know they have tried to work with us on particular problems and trouble spots. But the continual delays, despite their best efforts and that of harvesters, means that the only real solution is to get rid of this duplicative inspection. Again, that is what this bill will do.

This bill is a commonsense solution that will take away an unnecessary inspection, while ensuring that the Fish and Wildlife Service can continue to do their work and their jobs on other important issues affecting our coast and coastal communities.

It will put our sea urchin and sea cucumber businesses on equal footing with their partners in the shellfish industry who do not have this extra scrutiny. It will help the hardworking men and women who harvest and process in this fishery to dedicate their time and efforts to that fishery, not to the bureaucracy.

I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill, as we did in the past Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong opposition to the Trump administration's proposal to lift a decades-old ban on offshore oil and gas drilling on our country's Atlantic and Pacific Coasts.

This proposal has to be one of the most irresponsible actions of the Trump administration. Currently, 94 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf is off limits to drilling, and rightly so, given the importance of protecting the economic and cultural value of the country's coastlines.

The Trump administration has offered a staggering reversal, proposing to open up over 90 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf to oil and gas drilling. While Governors and lawmakers from both parties have risen to voice their opposition to this plan, this administration is moving forward at a breakneck speed. It has given a mere 60 days for the public to comment. In my home State of Maine, which has much to lose from this plan, we don't even get a full public hearing.

This proposal's lack of transparency and fairness couldn't have been more apparent than when Governor Rick Scott of Florida somehow earned an exemption for his State. Everyone can see that this was less about protecting Florida's pristine beaches and coastline, as Governor Scott said, than a political favor from President Trump.

Mr. Speaker, I absolutely have nothing against the Florida coast. But the State shouldn't have to be home to Mar-a-Lago to earn an exemption from this awful plan. All coastal States deserve this protection.

My home State of Maine is one of them. If you measured every inch of our State's jagged coastline and islands, it would measure an incredible 3,500 miles. Those miles include some of the most beautiful places in the world and critical habitat for hundreds of species of fish and wildlife.

That coast is also dotted with dozens of small towns filled with hardworking people who depend on a beautiful, healthy ocean to make their living.

Two of my State's largest industries are tourism and fishing. Tourism in Maine is a $5.6 billion industry, 71 percent of which comes directly in from the Maine coast. Millions of people visit our State to experience our beautiful coastline, snug harbors, and stunning landmarks, like the Marshall Point Lighthouse in Port Clyde.

Our fishing industry and businesses that support it have even more to lose from this proposal. Thirty thousand Mainers make their living in marine industries. They include boat builders, ground fishermen, clammers, seaweed harvesters, oyster and mussel farmers, and, of course, lobstermen.

Our world-famous lobster fishing industry alone brings in $500 million annually. I have had so many discussions with the lobster fishermen who tell me about all the difficulties their industry already faces. They want to pass their businesses on to their sons and daughters, but they worry about the future.

Will the Gulf of Maine, which is already warming faster than 99.9 percent

of the world's ocean waters, remain prime habitat for lobster? Will ocean acidification harm the lobster population and shellfish in ways we don't already know about yet?

Do we really need to add the potential of an oil spill to the list of things that already keep them up at night?

In Maine, we know the risk because we have seen the consequences. In 1996, a tanker named the Julie N. spilled about 200,000 gallons of heating oil in Maine's Casco Bay. It cost over $40 million to clean up and it caused lobster prices to plummet.

About 200,000 gallons of spilled oil is a drop in the bucket when you talk about the spilled oil from the Deepwater Horizon, which spilled 200 million gallons into the Gulf of Mexico. The result on the marine environment was devastating. Shrimp, crab, oyster, and other fisheries in those States may never fully recover.

The risks of this proposal to my State and others are simply too great. And for what? Our Nation is already the top producer of oil and gas in the world, and with fuel prices currently low, this proposal would not boost the economy.

If this administration is really worried about remaining internationally competitive in the energy market, it should throw its support behind developing alternative energy sources instead of abandoning them.

This proposal is unacceptable and irresponsible. I will continue to fight back against the environmental and economic harm it threatens for Maine and the Nation. I am proud to cosponsor legislation with my colleagues in New England to prohibit drilling off our States, and another bill to keep the drilling ban in place entirely along the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts. I encourage all my colleagues to do the same and to stop this terrible plan before it is too late.

Mr. Speaker, I recently sat down with Mainers who are terrified of the Republican tax plan:

In tears, a high school teacher listed the items she purchased for her students in need. Under this plan, she will no longer be able to deduct them.

A cancer survivor told me how she now writes off thousands of dollars of medical expenses every year--no more, under the tax plan.

A recent college graduate wondered how difficult it would be to achieve his career goals while paying off his student loan debt without a deduction for the interest.

A dairy farmer talked about a tax exemption that has allowed farmers to have more control over their businesses by forming co-ops. That is gone under the GOP tax scam.

In 10 years, one in five Mainers will pay more in Federal taxes under this plan. Their sacrifices and our national debt will pay for generous benefits to massive corporations, foreign investors, and the wealthiest of the wealthy.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to withdraw this thinly veiled handout to the one-percenters and bring forth tax reform that will actually benefit the middle class.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me the time and for all those wonderful compliments. I don't know that I have ever had that said about a bill that I have submitted, so I am very happy to be here today and to be able to support the Veterans Fair Debt Notice Act.

Mr. Speaker, as you heard, this bill offers a commonsense fix to frustrations that veterans in my district and across the country have experienced with VA's debt management system.

Veterans in Maine have called my office shocked to find out that they owe VA money. Some are confused by the letters they receive. Others are told by VA that they have missed important deadlines to dispute, to seek forgiveness, or to create a payment plan for the alleged debt.

Regardless of whether the debt is real or a mistake by VA, we shouldn't make it so hard for veterans to know their rights and obligations.

We have seen single mom veterans who can't get a home loan and newly transitioned servicemembers who struggle to reintegrate with garnished pay, recouped tax returns, and reduced disability payments, all because of assigned debts they knew nothing about after notifications got sent to the wrong place or ``lost in the mail.''

In response, H.R. 3705 directs VA to work with veterans service organizations to develop standard notification letters that are written in plain language. It also directs VA to explore how to inform veterans of debts more quickly by sending notifications electronically, like an email, in addition to standard mail.

It requires VA to study why so many veterans have not received notifications in the mail, as well as steps VA can take to improve its address database and the costs using certified mail.

I thank Chairmen Roe and Bost and Ranking Members Walz and Esty for bringing this legislation to the House floor, and I urge its passage.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the following names be removed as cosponsors of the bill, H.R. 3941:

Mr. Carbajal of California

Mr. Price of North Carolina

Ms. Fudge of Ohio

Mr. Huffman of California

Mr. Veasey of Texas

Ms. Roybal-Allard of California

Mr. Cardenas of California

Mr. Loebsack of Iowa

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Katherine Jennings Moxham who passed away on July 7, 2017.

Katherine Jennings ``Kate'' Moxham, 46, a resident of Kennebunk, Maine, died Friday, July 7, 2017 at Maine Medical Center in Portland from injuries received in an accident while riding a bike from home to the town library. She was an advocate for education, literature, science, the environment and personal rights, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation.

Kate was born May 5, 1971 in Kingston, PA, the daughter of Donald Bryden Jennings and Freda Ann Lockyer Jennings, and is a graduate of Merrimack College in North Andover, MA with a BA degree in history.

Kate was constantly seeking knowledge and educating. She loved reading, had a huge passion for libraries and learning, and was a constant advocate for both. She was vocal about what she stood for and fought for what she believed in. Having been awakened more recently (as she put it), Kate participated in the recent march for Women in Washington, DC, and in the March for Science in Boston.

Bringing people together to make connections and develop relationships, within her family, her wide circle of friends and her community was a hugely important part of her life. She was always the brightest light in the room wherever she was. Her laugh was infectious and her wit kept others in stitches. And her heart was as big as could be. She would help others without them needing to ask on a daily basis. And if they asked, she was right there.

One of Kate's passions was literature, and getting kids within her realm to pick up on that passion in any way she could. She was a volunteer at the Kennebunk Free Library, and served on its board of Trustees, including a term as board chair. Kate worked as librarian in the Kennebunk School System, at the Sea Road School library and also the Mildred L. Day School Library; created summer reading lists for all students from elementary grades through junior high, and created personal lists for students she knew so they would be challenged, intrigued, and enjoy the fun of a good book.

First and foremost was Kate's love of her immediate family--husband Todd of 17 years, and sons Tyler (15) and Riley (13). She was a tireless advocate for Tyler and Riley in the school system and in life. She loved to travel and show them new places and things to expand their minds, and to show them how to live in a community, taking care of others. She was planning to go next spring on a service trip with Tyler to Mississippi with a team from South Congregational Church.

Survivors include her husband Todd Moxham, two sons Tyler Moxham and Riley Moxham, all of Kennebunk, Maine.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Ranking Member for yielding and allowing me to reinforce my colleague from the State of Maine and say: if you haven't made your plans, it is not too late. Lobster season is just picking up. I highly recommend a visit to the Maine coast or anywhere in the State of Maine.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill to provide the VA Choice Program with additional funds and to authorize several provisions to improve care for our Nation's veterans.

Specifically, I want to recognize the authorization of a lease included in this bill for a community-based outpatient clinic in Portland, Maine, that will provide much-improved services to the veterans in that area. The new facility will be a huge step in improving the care for veterans in my district.

The proposed facility will go a long way toward a more efficient, patient-centered approach to care and will provide a wide range of services, including audiology, dental, physical therapy, prosthetics, and women's health.

Most of the veterans served by this new CBOC will be coming from the surrounding areas, and this new clinic will result in a much shorter commute for those veterans living in the most densely populated area of Maine.

The entire Maine congressional delegation has worked for the authorization of this lease, including my colleague, Mr. Poliquin from Maine's Second District.

I thank Congresswoman Brownley for introducing legislation earlier this year to authorize these leases and for her work on this issue.

I am proud to support S. 114, and I thank Ranking Member Walz and Chairman Roe for their work on this legislation. The authorization of this lease represents a tremendous step for our State in providing veterans the proper care they have earned.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member very much for yielding to me today.

I rise during this en bloc amendment debate to discuss an issue that is raised in the amendment about the importance of the DDG-51 to our Navy. In particular, I am grateful to our committee for the clear guidance and language that was provided in the fiscal year 2017 Omnibus Appropriations Act that was passed in this body just 2 short months ago.

That language called attention to the need not only to support the DDG-51 program but to ensure we do so with a design and upgrade that is technically mature and fiscally responsible.

It was clear in that language, and in report language that is included in the bill before us today, that Congress continues to expect the Navy to comply with the direction that the additional fiscal year `16 DDG-51 ship be contracted and completed as a flight II-A ship.

Because there are concerns raised by the GAO about the new flight III design radar upgrade for the DDG-51, there needs to be a thoughtful process in place.

Again, I want to thank the chair and ranking member who have been incredibly supportive of the DDG program in the past and the work that it brings to States like Maine and across the country.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong support of the Norcross amendment, and I want to thank my colleague for calling attention to this issue and the importance of EERE.

I represent the State of Maine, and we have over 3,000 miles of tidal coastline and millions of acres of forest. We are famous for our natural resources and the recreational opportunities that they provide, so it would be no surprise that these resources are providing our residents with an abundance of renewable energy sources.

Our State's natural resources and our efforts have made us one of the leaders in renewable energy development. From solar, to wind, to tidal, to biomass, Maine is a leader in renewable energy.

Because our State is largely a rural one, with many diverse energy needs in our rural and island communities, we are particularly attentive to rising energy costs and the need to have more ways to solve them.

This amendment today would restore funds to the EERE account, and it will help the State of Maine, like so many other States like it that are working hard to move our energy policy to the 21st century.

We have traditionally been in one of the most oil-dependent States in the country, but this will help us address rising energy costs with more tools and technologies at our disposal.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support renewable energy, and I support this amendment.